tv The Kudlow Report CNBC January 23, 2013 7:00pm-8:00pm EST
all right. look, obviously people are disappointed with apple. that's what happens. doesn't have any real support here, both from the research people who are probably going to downgrade it tomorrow or from the chart. and what can i tell you? it was not better than expected. i felt that the company should've done something. maybe talk about what they have a plan with with the cash. i thought it was arrogant they
didn't. i hadn't pounded the table on apple for years. the guys loving it. i don't know, they didn't get it. i'm jim cramer. see you tomorrow. dow gained 67 points today. by the way, the transport index, all time high. we must ask, does the latest bad news out of apple's earnings today change anything? . . and then there's this, hillary clinton has an emotional -- >> it's personal. i stood next to president obama as the marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at andrews. . . i put my arms around the mothers
and fathers. did we really learn anything new about the death of four brave americans? that's what continues to trouble me. the "kudlow report" begins right now. all right, inside this bullish stock market, two major earnings reports after the bell tonight. first, netflix hugely surprised on the upside sending the stock soaring. and then apple profits beat, but revenues came in light and so did guidance leading to a 10% or $52 drop in the stock. wow. the extended stock market rally continued today. take a look at the gains on the major averages year-to-date.
dow up 5.2% already. s&p up 4.8%. i have to believe this massive 16-month stock market rally. it goes all the way back to the fall of 2011. . . along with the u.s. energy revolution, aring if to help us this year on the economy. let's bring in our ace investors, david goldman, former head of income grout at bank of america and michael farr, author of "restoring our american dream, the best investment.
abigail doolittle, the investors killed it after hours. >> i think what's going on is an important inflexion point. we had another earnings miss, another guide down. this once superstar amongst the text stock has been falling for a few months. i think traders answered vestors were waiting for this report to see what the future with look like. unfortunately it's not as bright as some might have hoped for and that's now showing up in the stock. >> is there an offset here? google did very well today and revenue was very good. apple versus google consideration apple stop this rally? i don't think so but i want to get your take on this. what does it mean apple is doing badly? is it an apple thing, an economy thing or consumer thing or what? >> i think that's a great question. i think right now i tend to agree with you. i think investors will see this
as an apple-related event, we have a wonderful report out of netflix and google. we are going to be looking at the data out of china, whether the payroll tax cut will cut into consumer discretionary spending down the line. apples ipads and iphones sold a lot but the profit margin was slim. is this a company story where the company is in trouble after the great steve jobs has passed snarp. >> it feels that way, larry. we've got this darling-to-dog story we've seen so often notice tech space. we have a gadget company in the tech space that's struggling with margins on its gadgets and
a lot of the worst fears that they would face other gadgets from other kinds of companies seem to be coming to pass, but the service tech companies like google and netflix, they're all of a sudden out there increasing share. >> knock the cover off the ball. >> knock the cover on. and as long as you have a razor blade story and not a razor story, i think that's the difference peer. >> dave goldman, am i wrong? sometimes ji am very wrong. does this forecast a stronger american economy, even a moderately stronger economy? >> absolutely not. i was a raging bull in 2012.
i'm neutral on it. the s&p is trading tick for tick with liquidity measures, such as inflation expectations. >> that's what i talked about at the outset. easy money. you can't deny that. >> but the easy money is not going into investment. apple i think tells us something about the state of the economy. we no longer have an innovative disrupt of tech sector. we've got a bunch of stable franchises, some extremely vulnerable to foreign competition like apple. i think as long as we have an anti-business administration, we have reluctant to invest and reluctance to innovate, we looking at franchises that are fraying at the edges and profits that simply are not going to keep pace with where investors have put earnings. >> but you've had a lot of good
data points last couple of monies housing better, manufactured goods better, profits may turn out to be slightly better. the fed is easing. and m2 is growing, the bank of japan is ease like no tomorrow and they're depreciating in the end and i think it's a sign of easy money. so the bank of china is easing, the fed is easing. that's got to help the economy in the short run. >> i agree. there are some modestly encouraging signs, the housing market, the wealth effect, some certainty around the political situation, taxation, debt ceiling. on the other hand, despite all of that liquidity, we have mediocre employment growth, manufacturing data, while it has improved is still around that recessionary line of 50 and to
your point around m2 that's very interesting and yet we're still at record low velocity of money. that's very scary. all this money pumped into the system is sitting on the balance sheets of banks, corporations. >> nominal gdp is starting to rise. >> slowly. >> what about the information revolution? now, you made an important point. so far why should raise taxes on investors, terrible idea. i'm hoping do no harm, maybe some small spending cuts so that's not going to be a factor. i don't see a debt default. i think that's off the table. what blt american energy revolution, what about the growth, what about the cheap natural gas and what about how that makes america so competitive? i'm only talking 2.5% growth, not 3%, 4, 5% growth. >> the fertilizer trusts are on
fires. ammonia is going to be cheap, that's terrific. but here's a factoid for you. kmn's exports to asia are up 20% year on year. america's exports are up 1.5% year on year. what. >> what does that mean? >> our industrys are not competing and not picking up on the big growth areas of the world, asia. >> do you agree? are we stagnant? for four years we've had a 2% economy. it is the worst recovery since world war ii pull alls i'm saying, my god, i believe these factors of easy money and better stocks and what not can get us to 2.5%. i agree with you about employment. obama care stifles employment. 2.5%, that's better than nothing. >> we're talking about the same thing, though. david said, you know, we've got
a reluctance to invest and innovate in this country. we have impediments invented by capitol hill and congress and government to investors. you keep changing the rules. we don't know when it's safe to invest. >> the administration and the senate and the house would keep things stable for a while and take a boot -- take that boot off the neck of the entrepreneur, there's bubbling underneath this. a phenomenal explosion of american growth of ingenuity and entrepreneurship. just take the boot off the neck and give us stable policies. >> it's exactly what i talk about in my book "restoring the american dream." >> i can't believe i let him get that at the end of it but there you go. is he a good salesman or what? >> abigail, thank you very much.
david goldman, as always. it's about time for president obama to make a decision on the s keystone pipeline but the environmental lobby will not accept anything but total victory. they're even talking civil disobedience. and later on it was hillary clinton's big day on capitol hill answering sometimes very blistering questions about the september 11th benghazi attacks. we'll look closely at what we learned and what it all may mean. and doesn't forget, free market capitalism always the best path to prosperity. leave our economy alone and it will explode. trust me on that. i'm kudlow. we'll be right back. and...done. did you just turn your ringer off so no one would interrupt us? oh no, i... just used my geico app to get a tow truck.
more than half of the u.s. senate writing a letter to president obama today urging him to sign off on the keystone pipeline. i guess we can't expect the president is going to approve it any time soon, despite the promise of thousands of new jobs, a move towards energy independence and national security.
the president's already blocked it twice. me, i say drill, drill, drill. and on top of that, i say pipeline, pipeline, pipeline. but let's discuss, we bring in the director of public citizens energy program and the competitive enterprise institute. you got yourself 53 senators, you got yourself refiners in the gulf coast and texs that will help every american driver, how can you possibly block this? >> first of all, it's not going to result in lower gas prices. it's going to accelerate the rate of gas loon and diesel, ports, and, secondary, this doesn't do anything for national energy independence or security. an alarm lig increasing amount
of the canadian tar stands is being invested in and controlled by chinese natural interests. by 2020, they'll control production of nearly a million barrels a day. i don't see anything in the keystone good for the united states. >> i think the facts are wrong. i want to give you a shot at it, that china will control the industry and gasoline prices will be higher. i would think the improvement in the pipeline, getting it to refineries will make prices lowers. those are tyson's opening remarks. are they true or false? >> larry, you're right and tyson is wrong. shipping more oil from the canadian oil sands to the gulf will help the refineries down there, which are faced with lower and lower supplies from venezuela. the heavy oil in venezuela is similar to the heavy oil produced by the oil sands. so this will help.
and tysons seems to think it's a bad thing. if we get the oil, that's great for the american economy and canadian economy. the oil will still be bought and sold in a global market and chan is -- china is a part of that, as is the united states. building the pipeline will help the america economy. >> tyson, you're trying to cover up your basic argument, which is you hate fossil fuel and want to stop this at almost all cost. today we heard they'll have civil disobedience to stop this this evening. you don't want carbon in the air. on the other side, we're going to have carbon in the air.
the u.s. information agency said it's going to go up by 10% in the next 25 years no matter what we do and this pipeline will give you 25,000 direct jobs and 200,000 indirect jobs. put your cards on the table. you know you're making false arguments, tyson. >> absolutely not. there's no question there are three big issues here. one is climate change is very real and the tar sands oil has a greater impact on increasing global climate change and so we have to acknowledge that the weather patterns are increasing and getting worse and that continuing to produce and increasing the level of production of canadian tar sands oil is on going to make matters worse around the climate. >> myron, would you respond to that, please. >> yes. that oil is going to be produced by the government of alberta, will be sure the oil sands oil is produced. it's a question of whether we
ship it to the gulf, american refineries or to the west coast and chinese or asian refineries. it's a lock. >> but the gasoline is going to asia and china. >> that's good. it increases wealth. we don't, -- we don't export enough. >> the biggest problem we had when the gas prices went up early last year is the refiners couldn't get their paws on sufficient gasoline. this pipeline will pipe more oil down to the texas refiners and that in turn will be piped to the east coast and the west coast. you are completely wrong, tyson. you have the story utterly wrong, utterly wrong and all the refiners are in favor of this. the rest of it we will send, by the way, to latin america, to our friends in latin america, where our two-way trade is going
to increase substantially and on top of that you're losing us $150,000 indirect jobs or 200,000 indirect jobs and a solid 25,000 direct jobs. at some point you got to just stop being an obstructionist. the economy needs this stuff. >> there's a lot of other multi-billion dollar investments that can create as many or more jobs in sustainable energy infrastructure that isn't going to result in more catastrophic storms -- >> like solyndra. more government handouts that bankrupt the taxpayers and the federal government. you know, what that's probably what's going to happen. at the end of the day, i hate to say this, obama is going to put more phony green taxpayer subsidies to more companies that will go bankrupt and on the side made -- >> you have thousands that have
capitol hill by senate and house panels. the topic was benghazi attacks. if you missed it, this was definitely the most intense moment of the day, senator ron johnson of wisconsin asking mrs. clinton why the attack was not immediately called an act of terror. >> we're misled that there were supposedly protests and something sprang out of that, an assault sprang out of that. that was easily ascertained that was not the fact and the american people could have known that within days. >> with all due respect, the fact is we had four dead americans. was it because of a protest or because of guys out for walk one night and decided to kill americans. what difference does it make? it was our job to figure out what happened and figure out how to prevent it from it ever having again, senator. >> we'll be right back with more
executor of efficiency. you can spot an amateur from a mile away... while going shoeless and metal-free in seconds. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. now this...will work. [ male announcer ] just like you, business pro. just like you. go national. go like a pro. barrow island has got rare kangaroos. ♪ chevron has been developing energy here for decades. we need to protect their environment. we have a strict quarantine system to protect the integrity of the environment. forty years on, it's still a class-a nature reserve. it's our job to look after them. ...it's my job to look after it. ♪
debt ceiling but the spending sequester cuts are still set to kick in on march 1st and i hope they do. now house speaker john boehner says president obama is out to annihilate the republican party. we'll talk about all that with new hampshire senator kelly ayotte and our political panel in just a few moments. >> also, big time golfers phil mickelson, tiger woods, lebron james and derek jeter are all supply siders. we'll explain that later this hour. >> i wasn't involved in the talking points process. as i understand it, as i've been told, it was a typical interagency process where staff, including from the state department all participated to try to come up with whatever was going to be made publicly available. >> that of course was secretary of state clinton today on capitol hill saying she had no role in susan rice's false
talking points on the benghazi consulate attack. but will we ever find out why ambassador rice denied the terrorist attack and misled the public saying this on "meet the press." >> what happened in benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. >> and will we ever get a full answer on exactly what happened that night in benghazi. joining me former general wesley clark, and a former presidential candidate, peter brooks, senior secretary of defense. i want to start with my friend peter brooks. i didn't see the whole hearings. i read a lot about them, i caught some of them. i'm not sure i learned anything new today. with respect to that night, that cock and bull story about a spontaneous demonstration with a video, they never answered that, they never told us why. most of all, why did the
security break down and why didn't we do anything to try to rescue our americans? four died. why didn't we try to rescue anybody? i didn't hear any answers to any of that stuff. >> you're absolutely right. i watched both hearings and you watched part of it and you know as much as i do. we know nothing new today. the obama administration was winner and the american people was the loser. we no nothing more than weeks or months ago about this situation and it's still incumbent upon congress to get answers. how can you believe this administration about anything if we can't get straight answers on this terrible tragedy? >> general wes clark, welcome back. another thing is bugging me. state department mid-level officials said on a number of occasions during this whole period that they had three or four or five memos, cables, sent for better security and never
got them. today secretary of state clinton said she never saw the cables, never read the cables and winds up blaming republicans for not funding the state department. wes clark, you know bs as well as i do. that is sum of the biggest bs i've heard. >> i will tell you the state department has lost some of its requests for funding and funding in the security area. so that's a fact. secondly there's lots of cables that go back and forth in government. i'm certain the secretary of defense doesn't read all the cables that come in. neither does the secretary of defense. certainly there are people in the national security staff are trying to read them. people in secretary clinton's office or her staff are the addressees of those cables, they read them. when secretary clinton said these were decisions made below her level, i think she's speaking accurately. a lot of this going back and forth is done at the staff levels, far below the secretary. >> general, with all due respect, we have learned -- this
story always goes back to last september 11th. we have learned from time to time not only were security requests made by the consulate itself, not on were those requests acknowledged by the office of the state department, but, general, we have also heard on a number of occasions that the white house i guess read national security, the white house refused to put extra security because they didn't want to alarm anybody that al qaeda wasn't all dead, wrapped up and gone when in fact they were. they knew about the security requests, wes, and they wouldn't do a thing about it. >> actually, i didn't hear it that way, larry. what i heard was the purpose of the consulate, the basic purpose of the consulate, was to look out for the weapons trafficking, that we had a large cia presence there, that there was some connectivity between the cia presence and the embassy peckations that twho able to provide augmentation, support
and protection to the small group of people protecting the consulate it, adding more people into the consulate, perhaps there was concern they would undercut the cia mission. none of this has really come out public live because normally we don't really discuss the cia that much and what it does. and so i think we're going to have to wait until full answers until perhaps someone from the cia wants to provide the whole story of this. now, with respect to the people who -- >> but, general, please, i want to go to peter, i don't want to lose time. i appreciate it, general, as always. peter brooks, look, the story was wrong. we killed osama bin laden, fabulous. but the story that al qaeda was dead was dead wrong and now we're seeing al qaeda coming back with a vengeance in north africa. i'm suspicious there are elements of a political coverup because the basic policy argument that al qaeda is dead
is wrong and that's a part of this. i can't prove this and maybe never can but i still think it's a part of this. what's your take? >> this ran counter to the narrative that the obama administration was trying to lay out before the elections, that al qaeda was on the run, that it was on its heels and it want true. libya has turned out to be a failure and so has north africa and they're both related. you know, there's big issues here and it about foreign policy and hopefully tomorrow in john kerrey's hearing before the senate foreign relations committee we'll get into that because the real issue is the date on obama foreign policies. >> thank you. phil mickelson, tiger woods, lebron jamgs and derek jeter, guess, what they're all supply siders. i'm going to try to explain that to you up next. (announcer) scottrade knows our clients trade
and invest their own way. with scottrade's smart text, i can quickly understand my charts, and spend more time trading. their quick trade bar lets my account follow me online so i can react in real-time. plus, my local scottrade office is there to help. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade. voted "best investment services company."
excuse me, sir i'm gonna have to ask you to power down your little word game. i think your friends will understand. oh no, it's actually my geico app...see? ...i just uh paid my bill. did you really? from the plane? yeah, i can manage my policy, get roadside assistance, pretty much access geico 24/7. sounds a little too good to be true sir. i'll believe that when pigs fly. ok, did she seriously just say that? geico. just click away with our free mobile app. >> tiger woods and phil mickelson are rivals on the golf
course. i regard these two as supply-side golfers and they're trying to protect the fruits of their labors from confiscatory tax rates. how about that? one thing that troubles me, these are the fruits of their labor, professional golfers have to practice and work very hard to be at the top of their game. why is mickelson backing off now? >> he derives a ton of his income off his popularity. he made $4 million on the golf course, he made 45 from his sponsorship deals. tiger woods said i'm going to go wherever the tax situation is the most favorable. phil mickelson is saying i love california, i want to stay there but it's getting to the point where it's untenable for me to deal with it. it's not just succumbing to the media, people doesn't like it. >> which people don't like it? i love it. if you ask me, supply-siders all
across america who believe in the fruits of their labor love it. >> his image is important. the metaphor he used today in california when talking about it was he likened it to his shank off the tee in 2006 at the nt u.s. open, which he thought was the worst shot in his career. he feels maybe he should have kept his mouth shut and you say he shouldn't have. >> lower marginal tax rates in my humble opinion improve labor effort and investment and risk taking. he could stand up for all the tax oppressed people in california and it is one tax oppressing place and he could stand up for them and be a spokesman and say you guys are driving loyal people like myself out of here because you're taking so much out of my paycheck. >> if you want to broad i don't know the tax debate, california has come out and said we've balanced the budget, so why take that personalin come t income t
they finally got the budget right. whether you make 50,000 or 50 million, taxes hurt. >> other people who have moved around and we talked about tiger woods, what about lebron james? he was a great basketball star in cleveland. when he went to florida to the miami heat, a lot of people in new york said to avoid new york tax rates. anything to that? >> i think obviously there's no doubt when you're signing hundred million dollar contracts having no individual income tax is a big deal but this guy is going to be a billionaire someday. he had more control over putting this team together, there was more freedom over what players could go there. i trip it's always a factor. the fiscal cliff factor, people trying to bring bonuses up to 2012, players traded from florida to trooronto who didn't
want to report. >> taxes and tax rates affect economic behavior. now last one, derek jeter. he lives in tampa but he's got to play 81 games in yankee stadium. that's tricky, okay? i have a few residences myself, but i can't escape new york taxes. can he? >> to some degree he can because he's domiciled in florida. the way it works in baseball, whatever city you're in for that game, you have to pay state income tax in that state. if you're an accountant for a major league baseball player, it's a nightmare because they're paying taxes to 20 states throughout the country. >> and mickelson is going to have the same problem -- >> when he win as tournament in ohio as opposed to floor. >> domiciling saves him money but not on his entire contract. >> we should have no state income taxes, number one and federally we should have a flat tax rate no, deductions,
somewhere between 15% and 20% and then we can have more phil mickelsons and more derek jeter. up next, no budget, no pay. we're going to tack to one of the senators pushing that plan, even though it would mean missing her own paycheck. can they do that? and house speaker john boehner claims president obama is out to annihilate the republican party. organizatio oh, my goodness, annihilation.
house republicans voted to suspend the debt ceiling today until may 19th. they also included a no budget/no pay proposal unless both chambers introduced a budget by may 15th. senator ayotte, welcome back to the show as always. >> thank you, larry. >> we dodged a bullet, got the debt ceiling suspended for three months until may 19th. how about this no budget/no pay. is that going to work in the senate? >> larry, i think it should. it's been almost four years since the democrat-controlled senate has done a budget and it's just irresponsible for our country. i serve on the senate budget committee and i can tell you the two years i've been here it's the most disappointing this evening that they've not marked up a budget. harry reid said it would be foolish to do a budget.
i think they're changing their mind. how are we ever going to get control of the $16 billion in debt if we don't do a fiscal blueprint for the country? i'm glad also the house said they will do a budget that balances within ten years. >> well, good luck on that, good luck on that. let me ask you something else. another important date is march 1st. that is the automatic across the board spending sequester. senator ayotte, will that thing go through? it doesn't require a vote. it is the law. it says you do nothing, the whole sequester goes through, 1.2 trillion, you know this better than i do, about $100 this will this year. will it go lieu? >> i think the spend being cut will go through one way or the other. obviously i'd rather see us do a budget, prioritizing spending instead of cutting everything and we should eliminate programs that no longer work. one way or another there's a
spending cut that will happening. i think it's better if we eliminate programs that are no longer useful and prioritize spending. that's what people do at home and we should be doing here. >> how about letting the spending sequester go through and then have a new budget for the new year and which will presumably trim budgets even more. >> larry, the one issue -- i serve on the armed services committee as well and i think there are some cuts there that go way too far. secretary panetta said we'd be undermining our national security for generations. the safety and security of our country, particularly with what we see happening overseas right now we've got to focus on. otherwise you're right, larry. i am all for making sure that we adhere to those spending cuts. if we do anything to ameliorate them we have to have alternative spending cuts. yes, we need a budget for this
country. other people doesn't get paid when they don't do their job and that's why i think it's an important measure. >> do you have any democratic co-sponsors? >> we have joe mansion from west virginia. >> john boehner said president obama wants to annihilate the republican party. do you buy into that? >> i hope that's not true but we haven't seen a lot of outreach to the republicans. i think his inaugural speech was not one that cried for bipartisanship or outreach. i understand why the speaker is saying that. we need a president that's going to bring us together, especially on this fiscal issue, and i can understand by what we've seen from this president so far why the speaker said that. i hope it's not true. >> if you hang tough on the sequester spending cuts and give the taxpayers what apparently they want, i don't see how the president can annihilate you.
i think you might getting upper hand. >> i agree, larry. we had the fiscal cliff issue. he's gotten his revenue and it's time to cut spending. it's time for us to get a responsible fiscal blueprint for the nation and, yes, we should do pro-growth tax reform. you and i have talked about it on many occasions. that lowers rates for everyone and makes us more competitive. >> going to leave it there senator ayotte. good luck on the amendments. i appreciate that. >> let's hear from our distinguished panel. we have blake zeth and kelly ann conway, who just briefed the republican house members? virginia. kelly ann, annihilate the republican party. what was he thinking >> he was probably thinking of the alleged eye roll during the
inaugural luncheon to the way the president behaved in the first days of his second term. there is very little of the obama '09 inaugural speech. it was a very partisan, pedestrian speech, a double whammy. look at the way flpresident oba and paul ryan have behaved this week about the issues of our time, the debt ceiling and budget. it seems like the president is still in full campaign mode. his cohort said they're going to engage his campaign infrastructure. >> they're going to set up. >> paul ryan is back to his day job. he's the house budget chairman and he's shown a lot of leadership. i was in williamsburg last week. there was no talk about retrenching and collapsing and giving in to the demands and turning back on their promises.
there was great unity and they called the president's and harry reids bluff. they agreed with speaker gingrich when he said don't move the debt ceiling. sequester is the key. >> sequester is the key. it what his boss and president obama do not want. it would trim 1.2 trillion dollars, most of which would come out of social programs. however, if you were going to annihilate the republicans, would you choose to split the gop? in other words, i'm interested in the mechanics of this annihilation scenario. let me begin with immigration. the republican party is split on immigration. i'm glad they're split on immigration. at least now there are new sensible voices. i tend to be a little more
enlightened on this. is immigration where obama go to split the gop? >> if you want me to be honest -- >> be totally honest. >> you want annihilation. can you say that on this show. >> thank you. i think kelly ann might be able to back me up on this. i think the annihilation of the republican party is happening by elements of the republican party. you talked about the split you have. you have a lot of enlightened people such as yourself burr you have a lot of people on the fringe. there are people in the rather party who are willing to go there -- >> only 33 republicans voted against this today. seriously -- >> were they tea party republicans? >> not completely. >> were they club for growth republicans? >> the club for growth said they won't score this. they came out yesterday and said this was off the table and that was very sensible. but, look, you know what's going to happen, what's going to split
the democratic party? they're split on the other topic, guns. john testa reelected in montana. he's got a big problem on his hands because this is a guy, politically savvy, he had two years of a democratically controlled senate and congress and did nothing. he never even mentioned the word gun in his inauguration because he knows he's on a powder keg and trying to split the republican party there is going to back fire on him. >> i think the democrats are going to be far more split on this gun business than the republicans. >> i think it's true. guns is its own separate issue. it very hotly divisive. >> the president mentioned it in his state of the union -- i'm sorry, the inauguration. >> i think it's true this is a very tricky issue. but there's another area i think the democratic party may be split, that's when it comes to social security, medicare, those
types of things. when we get to sequestration time and it's time to talk about revenue, cuts, whatever it may be if president obama floats chain cpi like he did before, that's reindexing down -- >> he won't do it. >> he did it before. >> he did it for ten minutes and then his budget director and chief of staff, jack lew, who is going to the treasury department, who is not qualified to that position just backed out. he caved in to the left wing of the democratic party in the senate. i think that's a good divisive issue for republicans. that's how they divide democrats. we have a couple of them, on guns and entitlements. i don't know what got into boehner today. he's too pessimistic. >> i think he's a realist. he famously told harry reid to go and do something that we can't say on the air during the fiscal cliff talks. so, no, the speaker is in high
spirits and heeps got a -- he's got a lot more support today -- >> where is this annihilation talk today? >> larry, usually when you no longer have the prospect of a reelection, you become less partisan. he's just trying to nullify his base and check the boxes of those who helped him cross the finish line pip would say it's not the obama people thought they were getting in 2012. >> you see, i think if the republicans hang tough, and i mean tough, tough, tough, tough on this spending sequester, tough, just let it happen, it's the opposite of the tax bill, right? the taxes expired if you did nothing. the spending is cut in you do nothing. i say gop adheres to that and rips the democratic party into multiple pieces. you all democrats cannot take the reduction in social
spending. come on, acknowledge that. you won't be able to do it. republicans have you over a barrel. >> sequestration has tons of defense cuts and things republicans -- >> stop feeling me up every time i take a shuttle down to washington, d.c. they multiply like rabbits already. just stop it. >> ryan will put together a budget that will try to balance the budget in ten years that, will be even more unpopular than the one that does it in 30 years. the senate republicans will put together their budget, you put those two side by side. >> you think they'll get budgets to the? >> maybe because their pay is on the line. >> that's a gimmick. >> congress cannot make decisions on their own pay. it will be for subsequent -- >> something awakened harry reid
because he disagreed with nancy pelosi today. nancy pelosi said this is a booby trap. and the speaker said there's already a debate. >> i think both sides are going to try to annihilate each other and i say what else is new? thank you ever so much. that's it for tonight's show. thanks for watching. republicans, do something good for heavens sakes, get the spending sequester through! [ man ] ring ring... progresso this reduced sodium soup says it may help lower cholesterol, how does it work? you just have to eat it as part of your heart healthy diet. step 1. eat the soup. all those veggies and beans, that's what may help lower your cholesterol and -- well that's easy [ male announcer ] progresso. taste this soup.